本文設定討論之議題為「聶雙江歸寂思想研究」，此問題之設定最初乃是希望可以對雙江歸寂思想之實際意涵，作出清楚的分析。在考察過現今對於雙江思想的各方面研究之後，筆者發現，包括晚明當時的陽明弟子，以及近代諸多學者，一般對於雙江思想之理解，特別關注於雙江區分寂感體用，未發已發，如此乃是採取分解的方式來掌握良知概念，並且，一般亦據此評斷，在其分解之思路下所建立的本體論，發生良知析二、有缺的問題；而開展的工夫論，亦有偏靜離動，及實踐動力缺無的問題。 然而筆者認為，對於雙江歸寂思想的研究，另外還必須注意到雙江學術的基本關懷。由於雙江歸寂說之提出，其本意乃是希望藉由宣揚先師之教，以對治當時的學術弊病，然雙江所謂的「宣揚」，實際上是自己對於陽明學說的「再詮釋」，與陽明原旨存在若干差距，而筆者認為，正是在此殊異處，正可展現雙江所欲反省的學術問題。因此，本文設定從「雙江對陽明學說的詮解」此一面向切入，藉由探究雙江對於「致良知」的理解，重新考慮雙江歸寂思想之實際意涵，並釐清歸寂思想下諸多概念之確實意義，架構出歸寂說的完整輪廓，進而，筆者亦將思考雙江歸寂思想是否容納於陽明義理系統，乃至於儒家心學系統當中。 通過實際的研究之後，筆者認為，在本體論方面，雙江考慮王學流弊的問題，反對以知覺為良知，故以「寂」、「中」釋「良知」，意在突顯良知的本體義，強調良知作為現實一切存有的超越主宰，不與現實意念知覺相混雜，而有異質異層之區別。在工夫論方面，雙江通過「歸寂」思想來掌握陽明的「致知」工夫，認為「致知」不同於見聞學習，亦不能即於知覺思慮來用功，而著重在對於先天立本之學的追求，彰顯了儒家成德之教的工夫本質。在此之下，一方面，雙江對於「致知」、「格物」、「誠意」皆具有不同於陽明的理解，其以「知止」釋「致知」，意在表示自覺其性的工夫意涵，通過對於內在至善之性的自覺，擺脫意欲思慮的干擾，使生命向上提升至理想之境，並且主張「誠意」為「意而無意」之境界，「格物」為「感而遂通」之效驗，二者處皆無工夫。另一方面，雙江強調「敬持存養」，體認未發之中並存養之，使之不失卻，將工夫置於長期的修養歷程中，保持工夫的無間斷；又重視「勿忘勿助」，化除意念造作，消解人心私欲的干擾，如此才能明、誠，使未發之中全然朗現，而無助長之病與預期之害。通過這兩方面的主張，歸寂工夫論得以架構完成，並給予了工夫實踐上的保證，並且通過分析與比較，雙江歸寂思想的確可歸屬於儒家心學系統之下無疑。 As a disciple of Wang Yang-ming, Nieh Shiang-chiang (1487-1563) is famous for introducing the doctrine of returning to stillness. This thesis aims to show in what way Nieh’s doctrine results from his re-interpretation of Wang Yang-ming’s doctrine of liang-chih. In view of the negative development of the School of Wang Yang-ming after the master’s death, Nieh rejects the identification of liang-chih as a principle of perception. In order to counter the negative development, he also tries to explicate the concept of liang-chih in terms of the concept of “stillness” and of the “mean.” Besides, he denies the possibility of an instantious atualization of liang-chih. Finally, he eluicidates the essence of liang-chih with the help of the schema of substance-function. All this, however, gives rise to the suspicion that his doctrine is derivant from his master’s original position. In particular, his opposition to the posisilbity of an instantious actulaization of liang-chih would weaken the dynamic of moral praxis. But this thesis will argue that these differences merely indicate Nieh’s uniqueness in the theory of praxis, but his doctrine, in reality, remains consistent with Wang Yang-ming’s poisiton. In justifying such a claim, it will show that ontologically with the emphasis on returning to stillness, Nieh aims to reinforce the transcendence status of liang-chih. Further, on the level of moral praxis, its distinctive character is shown in his ideas of cultivating the mind by means of the respect for the moral laws and the sublime Heaven, and acting according to the natural Beconing. All this indicates that Nieh’s Confucian doctrine still belongs to the School of Mind.
